At Th. 3.70.4, a number of Corcyraean oligarchs are convicted of illegally ‘cutting stakes’ (τέμνειν χάρακας) in two local sanctuaries. The significance of this charge is disputed among commentators. We offer detailed support of Hornblower’s conclusion that the Corcyraean oligarchs are charged with cutting saplings from sacred land for use as vinestakes in their own fields. Our argument places Thucydides’ account of events in a larger philological, ecological and social framework, and suggests that the details of the accusation help establish abuse of communally controlled natural resources and the court system as prodromal stages in the social deterioration that ultimately produces the stasis on Corcyra and by implication elsewhere as well.

At Th. 3.70.4, a number of Corcyraean oligarchs are convicted of illegally ‘cutting stakes’ (τέμνειν χάρακας) in two local sanctuaries. The significance of this charge is disputed among commentators. We offer detailed support of Hornblower’s conclusion that the Corcyraean oligarchs are charged with cutting saplings from sacred land for use as vinestakes in their own fields. Our argument places Thucydides’ account of events in a larger philological, ecological and social framework, and suggests that the details of the accusation help establish abuse of communally controlled natural resources and the court system as prodromal stages in the social deterioration that ultimately produces the stasis on Corcyra and by implication elsewhere as well.

Coriolanus has been noted for his excessive pride. And the adage, 'Pride brings fall' can be applied to him. The text also gives evidence that Coriolanus earned this proudness from his mother, Volumnia. So, there has developed a thick component of psychoanalytical criticism about his dependency on his mother. Besides, Coriolanus has been well vindicated as a play contemporizing the events of ancient Rome in the context of early modern England, particularly in the equivalence of the Romans' uprising against the practice of usury to the Midlands Riot of England for corn in 1607, and Coriolanus's refusal to show his wounds to the people to earn their votes for his consulship has been connected with the antitheatrical movement of the 1590s, and King James's natural resentment of the publicity agenda. In addition to all these accepted interpretations, this essay would like to argue the case that it is Coriolanus's deep sense of patriotism that finally defines him despite the odds that he infamously becomes a traitor. Coriolanus is unwilling to show his wounds not because of exceptionality, but because of a perception of the uselessness of such a self-flaunting act, when he has done nothing else but serve his country to defend it against its enemies. After the single-handed victory against the Volsces by Coriolanus, Cominius in praise of him says that even the plebeians by going "against their hearts" (1.9.8) shall say that " 'We thank the gods / Our Rome hath such a soldier" (1.9.8-9). 1 Coriolanus would like to ask how the wounds do matter-twenty-seven or whatever! Can the number of wounds-fewer or more-ever translate his patriotism? Coriolanus's situation is like that of Lear when he is baffled by the quantifying stand of his two elder daughters regarding the number of his retinue he can keep if he was to be given shelter by them: Goneril: "What need you five and twenty? Ten? Or five?" (2.2.453). Regan retorts: "What